Greetings Kind Reader -
Thank you for stopping by today. However, I want to be upfront with you and let you know that if you came here hoping to read a witty little ramble so you could chuckle - this is not what you'll read today.
Related Articles
And if, after reading this, you decide you cannot tolerate me or my opinion and feel the need to 'unfriend' me on whatever form of social media platform you and I might utilize - then by all means, do. That is your right. And I want you to know that I respect you Kind Reader enough to not be resentful.
I cannot believe I'm even writing about this subject because my elders taught me there are 3 things you NEVER discuss in polite company. Those things are Religion, Money, and Politics.
Why? Because oftentimes a person might casually say something like Personally, I don't agree with So&So about such&such and I believe this&that'... so on and so forth. It seems innocent enough to say. We've probably all said similar things while gathering with family, friends, coworkers, etc. And after it's been said there's a little lighthearted banter.
But if the comment was made in reference to Religion, Money, or Politic
s all bets are off. The lighthearted banter falls to the wayside and the commentary can shift from spirited to downright spiteful. And when that happens it lead to rifts so deep and wide that destroy the relationships we cherish.
s all bets are off. The lighthearted banter falls to the wayside and the commentary can shift from spirited to downright spiteful. And when that happens it lead to rifts so deep and wide that destroy the relationships we cherish.
It is a lesson I took to heart because I have been an innocent bystander caught between people on differing sides. It wasn't pretty. And I decided I would follow that general rule of 'this is not spoken of'
However, there comes a time when I reach a point where I simply must say something.
It is partly my fault because I fell into the silent majority. I thought sanity would rule out the madness that started out as an annoying tumor. I thought it would be eradicated in swift fashion because it was absurd.
Only it wasn't.
And within a matter of months it metastasized such that it has become a Cancer of Absurdity that has spread across the whole of the United States infecting people desperate for a savior to rescue them from everything that's wrong in their lives.
At first the soundbites were so outlandish they were laughable. They made for great comedy skits on my favorite shows. But after a while those ridiculous soundbites became chants at rallies; battle cries, so to say.
And all along I thought for sure We, The People would shout 'No! We cannot have this! This must stop!'
But I, one of The People,
said nothing because I didn't want to ruffle feathers.
But I, one of The People,
said nothing because I wanted to be polite.
But I, one of The People,
said nothing because I worried what people might think of me.
And now I, one of The People, can
NO LONGER BE SILENT
NO LONGER BE SILENT
I, one of The People,
want to ruffle feathers.
I, one of The People,
mustn't fear 'not being polite'
I, one of The People,
refuse to worry about what people might think of me.
WHO AM I?
Let me begin by saying that I grew up in a liberal household. Please notice I did not put a capital 'L' in front of the 'ibral' because when one throws that defining point to a term it changes from being a person who follows a philosophical ideal to being a person wholly defined by the rigid rhetoric of a group of people.
And yes, Liberals can be just as rigid in their definition of what it means to have 'liberal ideas' as Conservatives are in their rigid definition of what it means to follow a 'conservative pedagogy'.
However I am not a person who decides whether or not I like someone simply because I don't agree with them. In fact, to do so would go completely against the very heart of the definition of liberal:
liberal: open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.
*Notice the words 'open to' and 'willing to' in that most basic of definitions.*
A person who follows the purest essence of what it means to be liberal-minded does NOT flat-out refuse to accept traditional values. And as a lover of words I know the impact even the smallest of terms can have. Which is why I've tried, perhaps not 100% successfully all the time, but I've tried to adhere to the purest essence of what it means to be a liberal.
That having been said I gladly admit:
- Yes, I have what most people would refer to as liberal ideas.
- Yes, I am willing to hear your side of an issue (I used the word 'issue' because I am loathe to use the word 'argument' as the connotation is negative). But if you are aggressive or if you try to force your ideology onto me - I will refuse to listen.
- Yes, if I feel that the winds of change have blown in such a way that 'traditional values' about a certain topic do not jibe with what I believe to be a forward way of thinking I push to have that 'traditional value' reexamined.
- Yes, I am big enough to admit when the way I thought would work doesn't. What’s more I will chalk it up to a learning experience and move forward with my thinking.
So why now?
Why, after nearly 8 years of blogging
have I decided to break my vow of
'No political posts'?
Why?
Because Donald Trump Scares the Hell Out of Me.
Because I, one of The People,
have heard the way he openly threatens those who dares speak out against him.
Because I, one of The People,
know that the only way to stop this madness is to speak up.
Because I, one of The People,
cannot sit idly by and expect someone to say the things I believe must be said.
And if, by some snowball’s chance, this post should find its way to the hands of Trump and his underlings – I’m sure they’ll all have a great laugh.
After all, I’m a nobody… in their eyes. I’m not a Billionaire. I’m not a Millionaire. I’m not even a Thousandaire but what I lack in monetary gains I make up for in moxie and spirit. I have a voice. And I vote.
I have watched the news and have seen how every day the Trump followers become more radicalized to the Trump-Way. And if you don’t think his supporters have been radicalized
- perhaps it’s because you don’t know what radicalization really is;
- perhaps you think radicalization is only a construct of religious zealotry; or,
- perhaps you think ‘I’m not a radical and I believe in him’.
If any of those ring in the slightest bit true perhaps you would benefit from reading the standard definition of Radicalization:
- Radicalization: (1) a process by which an individual or group comes to adopt increasingly extreme political, social, or religious ideals and aspirations that (1) reject or undermine the status quo or (2) reject and/or undermine contemporary ideas and expressions of freedom of choice.
No one, not even the staunchest of Trump supporters can deny that his campaign has been based completely on the notion of rejecting or undermining the status quo (Latin term literally: existing state of affairs). Granted that could be said of all the campaigns in this election season because all the candidates have talked about how ‘they want to change things’.
However, it should be noted that the Trump campaign has been gone out of its way to espouse ideas that don’t simply ‘shake up the status quo’ they harken to ideas that have nothing to do with democracy rather they scream of tyranny and oppressive, old world methods.
And if you think it’s utter nonsense to equivocate Trump to a tyrant
- perhaps you do not understand what a tyrant is;
- perhaps you do not know what the definition of tyranny is; or,
- perhaps you think ‘I would never support someone who was anywhere close to being a tyrant’.
If any of those things ring in the slightest bit true perhaps you would benefit from reading the standard definitions for Tyrant and Tyrannical.
- Tyrant: any person in a position of authority who exercises power oppressively or despotically.
- Tyrannical: unjustly cruel, harsh, or severe; arbitrary or oppressive; despotic.
Trump's words are a catalyst for hate, distrust, and filled with such vitriol it makes my stomach churn. Perhaps you don’t agree and that is fine. But surely must agree that Trump has used his position of authority as a political candidate to suggest that he, as President, would do the following:
· Would consider monitoring mosques –
Do you understand that this goes directly against the 1st Amendment of The Constitution?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
That literally means – the right of people to worship FREELY (as in the right to go into their House of Worship to pray, learn, and/or seek religious council cannot be restricted in any way by Congress – likewise, no Executive Order can supersede the aforementioned)
Consider for a moment a world where the US government does start surveilling mosques. What would keep them from surveilling Buddhist temples, Jewish synagogues, Catholic churches, Mormon temples … if a small number of zealots among the millions does something considered terroristic or subversive?
FYI – one of the reasons the ‘Pilgrims’ came to America was to flee England (and Holland – arguably one of the most tolerant places today and historically) was because they were oppressed by their governments in the way they observed their faith.
· Would consider censoring and/or sue the media for libel
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
That literally means – the government cannot impose itself on the press or private citizens in an effort to subvert or censure the right to report issues that might shed a negative light on the government; likewise, they cannot suppress the right of private citizens to artistic expression.
Consider the notion of a United States where the press has been altogether silenced, or forced to adhere to strict guidelines that are ‘Government Approved’. Do you want to live in a place where the government doesn’t let We, the People, know when corruption is running rampant in said government? Do you want to live in a place where the government ‘guides’ the news you get? Do you want to live in a country where journalists who speak out against the government run the risk of being fined or sued or possibly even imprisoned?
If you want to learn more about what it would be like to live in a country like that – perhaps you might want to consider spending a few months in North Korea. Or maybe you’d like to go somewhere with an ‘Old World’ flair like Russia. If you’re still on the fence try Syria. There’s always Belarus and Zimbabwe…
FYI – one of the MAIN reasons why the American Revolution was fought AND why the Framers of the Constitution put that line about the press was because their government had a death grip on what was allowed to be said and written by the press and private citizens – and those who spoke against the King were shipped back to England to stand trial.
· Would consider torture to get information from suspected terrorists
“In the Middle East, we have people chopping the heads off Christians, we have people chopping the heads off many other people. We have things that we have never seen before -- as a group, we have never seen before, what's happening right now. The medieval times -- I mean, we studied medieval times -- not since medieval times have people seen what's going on. I would bring back waterboarding and I'd bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding.” –
Donald Trump, 6 February 2016
Just because terrorists do something We, the People consider abhorrent does not mean the United States government should do those same things in retaliation. We are NOT in the Middle Ages.
And if We, the People, allow torture to be inflicted on ‘terrorists’ how long do you think it’ll be before the people that are tortured aren’t terrorists but people, citizens, who don’t go along with everything the government does.
· Would consider ordering US military branches to commit war crimes
“This really started with Ted [Cruz], a question was asked of Ted last -- two debates ago about waterboarding, and Ted was, you know, having a hard time with that question, to be totally honest with you. They then came to me - what do you think of waterboarding? I said, it's fine, and if we want to go stronger, I'd go stronger, too, because, frankly that's the way I feel.”
Donald Trump, 3 March 2016
Then after being informed that as Gen. Michael Hayden, former CIA director and National Security Agency stated, “[Soldiers] are required not to follow an unlawful order. That would be in violation of all the international laws of armed conflict. [a war crime]” Further, all branches of the US military have been trained to turn down and refuse illegal orders he was pressed for a response as to what his thoughts were on that.
“They won’t refuse. They’re not going to refuse me,” he said. “If I say do it, they’re going to do it.”
Donald Trump, 3 March 2016
Donald Trump not only stated in front of the world that he supported the use of extreme measures such as waterboarding and other torture tactics but that… if he was Commander-in-Chief, the military would do whatever he told them.
The fact that he made such a bold statement without stopping to think about it isn’t nearly as disconcerting as the reaction of the crowd who cheered his stance. A man who is praised for openly encouraging torture is terrifying.
That having been said, it must be noted that the morning after Trump had been informed as to the extreme concern the off-the-cuff remark he made at a nationally televised debate wherein he stated he would willingly commit war crimes, Trump changed his stance to…
“[I would] use every legal power that I have to stop these terrorist enemies. I do, however, understand that the United States is bound by laws and treaties and I will not order our military or other officials to violate those laws and will seek their advice on such matters… I will not order a military officer to disobey the law. It is clear that as president I will be bound by laws just like all Americans and I will meet those responsibilities.”
Donald Trump, 4 March 2016
Yes, I suppose there is some solace in knowing that he recanted his statement – but he didn’t have the eyes of the nation and specifically the eyes of his followers on him when he took back his comments. The takeaway being – those who cheered his urging of strong-armed tactics didn’t get to SEE him taking back his words. And that is a key point, Kind Reader.
Because hearing that someone swallowed a little humble pie is far less effective than seeing someone chew it and swallow it down.
Because hearing that someone swallowed a little humble pie is far less effective than seeing someone chew it and swallow it down.
· Would consider getting control of terrorists by going after their families
“[I]t’s a horrible thing. They’re using them as shields. But we’re fighting a very politically correct war,” he said. “And the other thing is with the terrorists, you have to take out their families. When you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don’t kid yourself. But they say they don’t care about their lives. You have to take out their families.”
Donald Trump, 2 December 2015
All that I, one of The People, can say to this is that it boggles my mind to know some of my fellow Americans are willing to embrace such a blatant disregard for human life.
· Put journalists in ‘the pen’ (that is not my term it is a Trump and Trump campaign term) amid rabid supporters where they are intentionally jeered on cue by Trump. AND threaten to ‘blacklist’ (as it was said by Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski) journalists who don’t adhere to the Trump campaign’s strict protocol.
When CNN reporter Noah Gray tried to move to film the protesters, Lewandowski turned to spokeswoman Hope Hicks and said, “Hey: Tell Noah, get back in the pen or he's fucking blacklisted”
Corey Lewandowski 18 November 2015
· Use his position to suggest to people that they should do what he would like to do only he can’t because of political correctness of today.
“Throw them [Bernie Sanders supporters] out into the cold. Don't give them their coats. No coats! Confiscate their coats. It's about 10 degrees below zero outside. You can keep his coat; tell him we'll send it to him in a couple of weeks.”
Donald Trump, 7 January 2016
“Bye-bye. Look, see, he’s smiling. See he’s having a good time. Ah, I love the old days, you know. You know what I hate? There’s a guy, totally disruptive, throwing punches, - we’re not allowed to punch back anymore. I love the old days. You know what they used to do to guys like that when they were in a place like this? They’d be carried out on a stretcher, folks. (CROWD CHEERS) Ah, it’s true. You know I love our police. And I really respect our police. And they’re not getting enough. (CROWD CHEERS) Honestly, I hate to see that. Here is a guy, throwing punches, nasty as hell, screaming at everything else when we are talking, and they’re walking out – and we are not allowed – you know - the guards are very gentle with him. He’s walking out, big high fives, smiling, laughing. I’d like to punch him in the face, I’ll tell ya’ (CROWD CHEERS)
Donald Trump, 23 February 2016
· Create an atmosphere of complete and total intolerance for the people he blames for taking away America’s greatness –
Mexicans
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
Donald Trump, 15 July 2015
Muslims (in general)
“They're not coming to this country if I'm president”
Donald Trump, 16 December 2015"
“Well you're going to have to watch and study the mosques, because a lot of talk is going on at the mosques”
Donald Trump, 16 November 2015
On the issue of creating a database of Muslims in America…
“I would certainly implement that. Absolutely. There should be a lot of systems, beyond databases We should have a lot of systems.”
Donald Trump, 20 November 2015
When asked whether or not Muslims in America would be required by law to register with the database…
“They have to be — they have to be.”
Donald Trump, 20 November 2015
Syrian Refugees (specifically)
“We cannot let them into this country, period. Our country has tremendous problems. We can't have another problem.”
Donald Trump, 16 November 2015
“We have no idea who these people are, we are the worst when it comes to paperwork. This could be one of the great Trojan horses.”
Donald Trump, 16 November 2015
China (for being a leading cause of US economic difficulties)
“Our country is in serious trouble. We don't have victories anymore. We used to have victories, but we don't have them. When was the last time anybody saw us beating, let's say China in a trade deal? I beat China all the time. All the time.”
Donald Trump, 16 June 2015
The bullet points I’ve addressed in this post were not pulled from thin air. They are what Donald Trump said – verbatim – and as such they are truths that cannot be denied. And if he is a man of his word, which he insists he is, then Donald Trump (if he should somehow find his way into the Oval Office) would be beholden to stick to his word lest he be called a charlatan and a liar.
All in all, if Donald Trump does somehow become POTUS and sticks to his words then…
